Skip to content

Conversation

@alexmalins
Copy link
Contributor

@alexmalins alexmalins commented Jan 7, 2025

Closes #XYZ (an existing open issue)

What are the key elements of this solution?

#714 removed harlequin-databricks as a dependency, probably due to a conflict with the databricks-sql-connector package placing a low upper limit on the pyarrow version

The latest releases of databricks-sql-connectorand harlequin-databricks remove upper bound specifications on dependencies as far as possible to avoid these sorts of dependency issues.

This PR reinstates harlequin-databricks as a dep of this project in the pyproject.toml & relocks with the latest poetry release.

Also bumps the target python version for ruff and mypy to 3.9 in line with #714

Why did you design your solution this way? Did you assess any alternatives? Are there tradeoffs?

Does this PR require a change to Harlequin's docs?

  • No.
  • Yes, and I have opened a PR at tconbeer/harlequin-web.
  • Yes; I haven't opened a PR, but the gist of the change is: ...

Did you add or update tests for this change?

  • Yes.
  • No, I believe tests aren't necessary.
  • No, I need help with testing this change.

Please complete the following checklist:

  • I have added an entry to CHANGELOG.md, under the [Unreleased] section heading. That entry references the issue closed by this PR.
  • I acknowledge Harlequin's MIT license. I do not own my contribution.

I think the deps issues on locking could have come
from upper bounds on the pyarrow & numpy version
set by the databricks-sql-connector

Those upper bounds have gone in the latest
databricks-sql-connector release (3.7.0), which is a
requirement of the latest harlequin-databricks release
(0.5.2)

databricks/databricks-sql-python#452
@tconbeer tconbeer closed this Jan 7, 2025
@alexmalins alexmalins deleted the fix-harlequin-databricks-deps-issues branch January 7, 2025 23:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants